INAUGURAL ADDRESSES

Initiate (inaugurate?) the new year of 2017 with a serious look at the topics of political language as represented by the addresses given by newly inaugurated Presidents. If I were able, it would be less than the 1,000 words herein, but sorry.

Also gives me a chance to put in another good word for a President who continues to rise in my estimation, James Garfield. Not for his actions as President, though in his short time he did a lot, but because of his lifetime accomplishments.

Much of this is based on a January 12, 2009 article in The New Yorker magazine by Jill Lepore. You will notice a much more level and less antagonistic political attitude in that 2009 article than we see today, particularly the disdain that is typically leveled at Republicans in general and the "deplorables" in particular. Their apparent audience today seems to be that minority that resides on the coasts and subsists on lattes, kale and free range chicken with a liberal dash of contempt for people who work for a living and live elsewhere. Figures--Obama had just won.

James Garfield was a Republican (gasp) who is praised in Lepore's article (double gasp), born in a log cabin, but not, in the author's opinion, the match for Lincoln, another member of the log cabin fraternity. At least when it came to oratory. Garfield continued as a candidate and as President to further the principles of not only abolishing slavery but achieving full citizenship for Negroes (now known as African Americans…or just Americans?) to the chagrin of Democrats.

Frankly, I am not an expert, but it is difficult to argue about Lincoln's status as the finest speechmaker to occupy the White House, and his inaugural addresses are pretty darn good. For instance, see the suggestion and his rewrite:

Lincoln gave a draft of his first inaugural to his incoming Secretary of State, William Seward, who scribbled out a new ending, offering an olive branch to seceding Southern states:

I close. We are not, we must not be, aliens or enemies, but fellow-countrymen and brethren. Although passion has strained our bonds of affection too hardly, they must not, I am sure they will not, be broken. The mystic chords which, proceeding from so many battlefields and so many patriot graves, pass through all the hearts and all the hearths in this broad continent of ours, will yet harmonize in their ancient music when breathed upon by the guardian angels of the nation.

But it was Lincoln’s revision that made this soar:

I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Today we can't see anything about these addresses without seeing Kennedy's "Ask not…" written for him by fellow Nebraskan, Ted Sorenson. But it wasn't a great address…just pretty good.

One of the stellar points made in the article is that every nineteenth century inaugural except Zachary Taylor's mentions the Constitution, another fact and sentiment noticeably absent in publications like The New Yorker, The New York Times, etc. Listen up when you hear the oath of office--they do not swear to serve the people but to "uphold the Constitution." Thoughtful people have worried that "By appealing to the people, charismatic Chief Executives were bypassing Congress and ignoring the warnings of—and the provisions made by—the Founding Fathers, who considered popular leaders to be demagogues, politicians who appealed to passion rather than to reason". This worry has been extended to the appointments to the Supreme Court which invites disaster.

Another point, similar in tone and potential impact is that the speeches in the twentieth century have become pandering, sloganeering and begging for applause. Part of this is the change in the society and the "American" language, but part of it is, regrettable, the "absence of precision, the paucity of ideas and the evasion of every species of argument." The speeches are mostly written by journalism graduates who have been brought up on Strunk and White's "Elements of Style ("Omit needless words") and Orwell's 1946 essay "Politics and the English Language" ("Never us a long word where a short one will do"). 

At this point, take another look at Lincoln's speeches--I would maintain that he conformed to Elements of Style and Orwell but retained an elegance and grace totally absent in today's speeches.

Back to my man, James Garfield. He was not inaugurated until March, as was the law then, but he worried in his diary about the speech from early after the election, even going so far as to consider scrapping the whole idea. After all, there is no legal reason to make such an address, just the custom established by Washington.

In the end, it was passable:

My countrymen, we do not now differ in our judgment concerning the controversies of past generations, and fifty years hence our children will not be divided in their opinions concerning our controversies. They will surely bless their fathers and their fathers’ God that the Union was preserved, that slavery was overthrown, and that both races were made equal before the law. We may hasten or we may retard, but we can not prevent, the final reconciliation.

"Race relations" would be the current phrase. Worse than they have been in most of our lifetimes. Maybe things will get better, but the divisive attitudes make us worry. My vote was for Trump, but my hope is that his inaugural address will be a bit more than tweets. Let us hope for a map for the future, a guide to actions and activities that can unite this great land. We really need the elites, the press and many celebrities to embrace a society where their views are heard and considered, not just their bile directed at the rest of us. Let's review the lesson as stated by Jefferson in his first inaugural:

If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this Union or to change its republican form, let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.

In the lingo of today, comments attributed to the military and police: "I hate what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it."

JAPANESE SEX

JAPANESE SEX 
A Japanese couple is arguing about how to perform highly erotic sex. Husband: "Suki taki. Mojitaka!" 
Wife replies: "Kowanini! Mowi janakpa!" Husband says angrily: "Tok a anji rodi roumi yakoo!" Wife, on her knees, literally begging "Mimi Nakoundinda tinkouji!" Husband shouts angrily: "Na miaou kina Tim kouji!" I can't believe you just sat there trying to read this! You don't know any Japanese! You'll read anything as long as it's about sex.... Sometimes I worry about you. You're in need of serious help!

OBAMA'S LEGACY

OK, this is pretty long. The first part isn't, but the part about Detroit drags on.

Sorry. In my experience, those who disagree with my positions described herein will not often respond with factual positions of their own that are contrary. Instead, they attack by name calling. Maybe they just don't have any valid arguments?

OBAMA'S LEGACY

From the Wall Street Journal (delivered to me by Larry):

Something very positive about Obama, who has been obsessed with his legacy.

The real Obama legacy he leaves behind are:

A Republican President

Republican Vice President
Republican control of the Senate
Republican control of the House
Republican control of 31 state houses
A majority of Republican governors - 36 of 50
Republican control of a majority of county governments
Republican control of a majority of city governments

Not to mention his "Affordable Care Act" that is anything but affordable, was never destined to be so due to the rules allowing patients with pre-existing conditions to obtain insurance.

I know of no news media or Democrat who acknowledges the irony of that name, however.

Let's take a look at the last of Obama's dubious accomplishments, the city governments. The ones that are not Republican run are the basket cases, Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, etc. that are run, and have been for decades, by corrupt predominantly black politicians. In the mold of Detroit Mayor Coleman Young who drove that city down further than any could have seen using "tin cup urbanism" (you budget a deficit and run to the feds for funds) and racist techniques (one of his first moves as mayor back in the 1970's was to reduce the police force…by firing the white police officers). Attached below is something I wrote in 2013 about Mayor Young and Detroit.

OK, let's take a look at the ACA. I was recently in Denver, got sick and went to an Urgent Care doctor. "Doc in a Box." The physician was skilled, Jewish, about 50 years old and I asked how long he had done this. "Family practice until 4 years ago. Obamacare ruined medicine, I had to do something else." Nobody seems to acknowledge the flaws of the ACA that have led to this catastrophic impact on medicine.

The handling of pre-existing conditions is tragic. Most of us who claim to be fiscally conservative yet socially liberal support a system that allows people who are sick to get and retain insurance and, thereby, treatment. The old system threw up all kinds of conditions and rules to block such transfer, shifting blame (and dollars) elsewhere. Shifting money is not saving money.

For some reason, I am too busy to extensively research the health care topic, mainly because I have a total lack of fundamental knowledge and that is always a recipe for arriving at the wrong conclusion, much like we see in the media all the time. Hopefully, Trump will select people who have a bit more knowledge than Nancy Pelosi.

Here is the essay from 2013:

COLEMAN YOUNG AND THE DEFEAT OF DETROIT

We are entitled to our own opinions, but not our own facts. I tried to focus on the facts.

George Will:

In response to a comment by MSNBC economic analyst Steve Rattner that the federal government (taxpayers) and the state of Michigan (more taxpayers) should bail out Detroit, Will said:

“Can’t solve the problems, because their problems are cultural. You have a city, 139 square miles; you can graze cattle in vast portions of it, dangerous herds of feral dogs roam in there. 3% of fourth graders reading at the national math standards, 47% of Detroit residents are functionally illiterate, 79% of Detroit children are born to unmarried mothers. They don’t have a fiscal problem, Steve, they have a cultural collapse.”

Of course, ABC This Week resident liberal panelist Kristina Vanden Heuvel was (pretend) outraged over Will’s honest – and correct – assessment:

“I find that really insulting to the people of Detroit. I think there is a serious discussion about the future of cities in a time of deindustrialization. But in many ways, Detroit has been a victim of market forces, and I think that what Steve said is so critical; that retirees and workers should not bear this. And this story should not be hijacked as one of about greedy, fiscal, public unions.”

REGRESS TO A THIRD-WORLD LEVEL, OR WORSE

I recently saw a picture of current-day Hiroshima alongside a picture taken of modern-day Detroit. Shameful, but shows what the human spirit can do if given the right set of tools and the right mind set and culture.

In 1960, Detroit had the highest per capita income in the nation. In 1962, Democrats took over. Facts about current Detroit in addition to those noted by George Will:

·         Less than half the residents over 16 are employed.

·         About one third of the ambulances are functional and the average 911 call response time is 48 minutes

·         Sixty percent of Detroit children live in poverty

·         Forty percent of the streetlights do not work

·         Two thirds of the parks have been closed since 2008

·         Fewer than 10% of Detroit crimes are solved

Coleman Young presided over the crushing defeat of a once-great city, Detroit.

Young was elected on a platform of "A People's Police Department' in 1972. For an unprecedented five terms, 20 years, his aimless, racist platform guided the city to the payday, bankruptcy. But his political course, seemingly without much more sense than an abiding confidence that racism was the cause of all the ills, not only set the stage for the 2013 collapse, but insured that there would be no way to avoid catastrophe.

In his autobiography, Mayor Young (whose last days in office were consumed with defending himself and his administration from charges of corruption, fraud and embezzlement) places the blame on:

·         Federal policy

·         Superhighway construction

·         Blockbusting

·         White racism.

WHITE FLIGHT AND VIOLENCE

Detroit's population fell from 1.84 million in 1950 to less than 700,000, currently. Moves such as the use of eminent domain to eliminate a predominantly white, middle class neighborhood, Poletown, lack of and inconsistent law enforcement plus the desegregation of the schools created "white flight" to the suburbs along with middle-class blacks.

It is and has been one of America's most dangerous cities, joining its neighbor, Flint, Michigan to take the top two spots.

"TIN CUP URBANISM"

Mayor Young, a radical trade unionist with an anti-establishment policy, reached out to black voters with no plan except a demand that the Federal Government save it with subsidies, an entitlement attitude that came to be known as "tin-cup urbanism." By the late 1970's, federal subsidies and grants paid the salaries of 1/3 of Detroit's workforce. Not just city employees, THE WORKFORCE!

He maintained a divisive attitude, starting with the layoffs of 1,000 police soon after election. The layoffs were drawn from separate lists, black and white. When gangs attacked theater goers in 1972, it took twenty minutes to respond due to the lack of manpower.

WIPE OUT WHITES

General Motors was enlisted to build a new plant in Detroit, and the area chosen was not one of the severely depressed areas with high vacancy but a predominantly white, Polish community known as Poletown. Destruction of Poletown by Young and GM has been cited as one of the flagrant abuses of eminent domain powers and ended up at the Supreme Court.

At the same time, the Coleman Young Foundation claims that he "increased the awarding of minority contracts an astounding seven thousand fold, spurring an African-American entrepreneurship that continues to transform the city."

Don't know what kind of transformation they are referring to, but it isn't very good. Sounds more like the governments of Robert Mugabe, or more likely, the thieving government of Equatorial Guinea.

POLICE

He and his ally, Police Chief William Hart made it clear that "...too many arrests or citations in the black community would not be tolerated." His goal was to have a "black-run city," and he achieved it as white and middle-class black residents left the city rapidly. When residents complained about the lack of enforcement, Young and Hart blamed the complaints on "racism and sour grapes."

The LA Times reported that Hart's daughter received a house in Beverly Hills paid for by funds from Young's secret gold-trading company.

SUCCESSORS

Young opposed his successor, Supreme Court Justice Dennis Archer, and his allies blocked Archer's agenda including efforts to reduce patronage in the city government. (I am reminded of President Garfield's elimination of patronage in the Federal government...in 1880, one hundred years before!) Then came Kwame Kilpatrick. Convicted of 24 Federal counts, including mail fraud and racketeering and currently serving prison time.

When Dave Bing, a professional basketball star with the Detroit Pistons took over, he could see that Detroit was bankrupt on several levels, socially and fiscally. No hope.

BLACK-GOVERNED DETROIT

Young claimed that "...black-governed Detroit reached a level of autonomy...no other city can match." He was obviously delusional, but then he had made people believe false claims for more than twenty years.

He was not totally responsible for the union pension fiasco. Detroit apparently now has obligations exceeding $5 billion. The pensions are in jeopardy, and with Young's militant trade unionism, those pensions got out of control in his twenty years.

THE PRISM OF RACISM

Young stated that, "The victim of racism is in a much better position to tell you whether or not you're a racist than you are." No doubt black people have been the victims of racism in the United States, but I wonder if anyone listened to the white victims of racism in Detroit.

I used the phrase "looking at the world through a prism of racism" the other day. Whether Young actually believed his hype or just used racism as a vehicle to attain political power, persistent racism on his part, viewing the world through a prism that perceived white racism against blacks at every turn, was a fact in "black-governed Detroit."

Despite racism, in one aspect, numbers, the black population has fared better than the rest. The black population has grown faster than the total population of the nation. In 1930, blacks accounted for 9.7% of the total US population and today the 45 million African Americans are 14.1% of the total US population. Big enough to control the vote in many cities, maybe the nation.

Detroit is a failure. Is that what we have to look forward to in the rest of the country?

ADVERTISING

The polls got it wrong.

I'm writing about something that is not in my store of knowledge (huge storehouse of non-knowledge!!), but I'm just wondering how much else is misjudged by the experts and the elite.

For instance, the NFL. Advertisers spend a pretty huge chunk of change to support things like the $61 million guarantee for a certain part-time quarterback in San Francisco. Wonder if they are upset with the fact that the NFL ratings are in the tank? Like down 15% in some numbers I saw a while ago?

If political polls were inaccurate where I would think the candidates expect accuracy, not pandering, how about the "analysis" that is worth zillions of dollars, like the analysis of TV audiences?

Jon Stewart and his descendants have turned the late night landscape into unabashed liberal advocacy with the exception of Jimmy Fallon. Fallon, of course, was subjected to his own ridicule by the other late night hosts when he had Trump on and treated him like a human. I think the "flyover" states and the people who go to work every day are a bit tired of being bullied and treated as imbeciles, told what to think and how to act by the Stewarts, the Kardashians and the elites in general.

The elites in Hollywood and TV have tried desperately to sway opinion, and have made a huge impact. Do you wonder what Whoopi's agenda might be? She is all in favor of considering her viewers as "deplorables," but what if you are an advertiser on that show. You would be subject to the usual racist, misogynist, etc., labels if you were to pull your advertising, but when it comes down to dollars, can you afford to advertise when nobody watches? Or if the analysis of the audiences is flawed the way the political polls were flawed? That is what happens when your base of citizens who are polled don't match the ones who will actually vote. Or, in the case of the NFL, watch and buy the products.

I have yet to see any knowledgeable discourse on this. Jon Stewart nearly single handedly caused the show "Crossfire"--where thoughtful guests with differing opinions were able to debate-- to be run off the air. http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/12/opinion/begala-stewart-blew-up-crossfire/

Then he created the "comedy" of hate, scorn, mockery, one-sided bullying, ridicule and cruel cheap shots. He got away with calling it "comedy"! Now, remember, only what he considered to be conservatives and Republicans were accorded this treatment. If you can scare up an episode where Obama, the Clintons or any of his minions were attacked, I'd like to see it. Wonder if anybody is thinking "This isn't resonating the way we thought it used to."

Will keep researching this, but I think you may see the people with money begin to think a bit harder about where they put their money.

LAST WORDS

Aren't we all overjoyed to contemplate the election madness in the rear view mirror? As most of you know, I worked as an election official again, one of 1,450 manning 98 polling stations in Virginia Beach. Lots of hours (5:00 AM to 8:30 PM plus training, set up), but great to be part of the process.

The mandate from the city election commission was to make sure that we did all we could to allow every voter who showed up the ability to cast a ballot, and there was only one failure for our polling location--a young woman who showed up registered properly in the city in which she lived, but unable to go there yesterday because of work. She should have voted absentee, but there was nothing we could do. The records are excellent, our crew was pretty experienced and skilled, so we were able to handle address changes, name changes and everything thrown at us.

I had two people ask me how to mark their ballot for Hillary, both appeared to be illiterate. When Linda and I were in Sweden, we went out to get a bottle of vodka (rhymes with Friday, right Kevin?) and a snack as it was late and we didn't want to do the restaurant thing. We ended up in a grocery where no one spoke English, a rarity in Sweden, and we tried to figure out what were crackers and what were cookies, what was cheese and what was some sort of spread, etc. We found airline bottles that said "vodka" and thought we had what we needed.

Got back to the hotel, sliced the apple, elated to find that we indeed bought crackers and popped the vodka. Turned out to be lemon extract. Yuck! But gives you a bit of empathy with the lives of people who can't read.

Oh, and yes I gave them the correct info on how to mark for Hillary although I'm not sure that I was supposed to as an election official!!

Our precinct results for President mirrored the national with Trump a bit farther ahead. Northern Virginia around Washington D.C. swung the state so that Clinton carried the electoral votes. Our area has endured the effects of a weakened military and northern Virginia is the beneficiary of the expanding bureaucracy.

Linda and I did better on local election knowledge, and had studied the candidates for Mayor, City Council, School Board, Constitutional Amendments so that we had our "informed" opinions. Not easy to find good information on those. Local newspapers are strapped for money and the internet doesn't care. The presidential campaign may have made us wonder where the honest and capable people might be, but letting local government proceed without much in the way of oversight is a recipe for disaster.

One of the Constitutional Amendments involved making the current law providing Virginia as a "right to work" state into a provision of the Constitution. Apparently, so that it would be more difficult to change. I had, perhaps, a dozen inquiries/complaints about the wording and people just didn't understand. Seemed to revolve around the use of the word "prohibit" in the long, run on sentence. My guess is that the attorney who drafted the language was completely unaware of the regular voter's vocabulary and difficulty with sentences that ran to multiple clauses, numbered sections and phrases that are not part of our every day speech. It was a close result.

An impassioned plea from Hollywood actor George Takei was posted on Facebook this morning lamenting how the "weak" were going to be harmed. Like so many, I agree that we need to respect and defend the rights of the members of our society, but I don't think we should do that by punishing useful members of that society. Difficult to discuss these things with many liberals today because when you do, they shout epithets at you and key your car.

BTW, George--the word is "charted." As in "we are going into uncharted waters." Not "unchartered." His command of the language is apparently as flawed as his logic.

Back to newspapers, media, social media, etc. How did all the "experts" get it wrong? I have never experienced anything as blatantly one-sided as the coverage of Clinton and the condemnation of Trump. Sort of plays into my recurrent theme of the media feeding me information and when I know about something, my reaction is usually "No, that's wrong!" What about the huge number of topics where I have no personal knowledge? Should I believe that they get that stuff right? That on those topics, they are competent and it is only the areas where I actually know something where they get it wrong?

My guess is that pollsters/MSNBC/Yahoo/CBS have become accustomed to ignoring the middle of the country, the men and women who go to work every day in a factory, in the diner or restaurant, in hospitals and farms or running a small business (we don't have the time, usually, to riot in the streets). No need to include in the polls or even consider them, they don't matter.

I am still trying to wrap my head around the fact that Trump was so feared and demonized by all the elite. I get why the Clinton and Bush royal families might stick together, but are things that bad that they cannot withstand the light of day?

Let's spend the next eight years uniting the country, tightening our borders as Bill Clinton declared we should in his 1995 state of the union message https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m3yesvvYEvs that talks about a fence which is evidently fundamentally different than a wall. Making sure that this country upholds its traditional role as a haven for the oppressed, but with some caution so we don't make the same mistake as Germany. Let's spend the next eight years mending the horribly disruptive policies of Obama that has created a racially divided atmosphere as bad or worse than what I remember of the 1960's. Support law enforcement. Let's find a way to employ the 10 million idle men of working age who are NOT INCLUDED in the official unemployment statistics http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/06/the-missing-men/488858/ .

There is something fundamentally wrong with our economy evidenced by interest rates at near zero. In the last eight years, our military has been gutted, the Middle East has gotten worse, not better. Petty tyrants in the Philippines and North Korea can rattle their swords and intimidate the US without fear of consequences. These grown up two-year olds and all of these problems are like the elephant in the living room--we know it's there, we just don't mention it.

Hopefully, we can move forward.

IRONY?

We all know that as we mature, we quit growing. Except I have read that your nose and your ears continue to grow, even into old age.

Ironic, then, that my sense of smell and my hearing are getting worse.

Thought you might need some truly frivolous info during the closing days before the election.

WIND POWER

WIND POWER

When I first worked with the people of Midwest Energy, I was impressed with many things, but two stood out:

·         These were really smart people who worked in a well-organized structure

·         Provision of electric power through a grid to thousands of customers was an intricate process

Spoiler Alert: This continues a theme that I have mentioned before, which is that the news media, but also other amateurs, usually get a complex subject wrong when they report it. This opinion is based on many instances where the media reported on something THAT I PERSONALLY KNEW ABOUT. Then it made me wonder how many times I had believed the media on a topic that I was ignorant of...and gotten the wrong info!

I would really like to query the people who support and implement the huge subsidies that the government provides to make wind power "feasible." Sorry, wind power is not feasible from any true financial standpoint, whether oil is $50 per barrel or $150 per barrel.

For details supporting this opinion, please read:

https://www.masterresource.org/natural-gas/how-many-households-can-a-large-wind-project-serve-lessons-from-texas-and-the-uk-part-1-of-2/

Plus their reading list that contains the writings of smart and knowledgeable authors, contrary to what you see in the media.

Ignore the intricate financial analysis for a minute, the broad brush paints a picture where the cost of wind power is exorbitant. There are other significant details in the article that circle back to the two bullet points at the beginning of this blog post--this is a complicated, intricate endeavor.

We all remember the hue and cry in California when the state experienced brown outs and black outs due to inadequate capacity in 2000-2002. It is fair to note that not all of the capacity shortage  then was due to generating facility inadequacy, some of it happened due to fuel shortages, but the primary reason for the shortages was that the economy was booming, demand was growing but the California PUC and the public resisted every effort to build more capacity.

One may conclude from this that the public does not like building more power plants, building more transmission capacity, building more fuel supply sources in order to meet increased demand, but the public also does not like having no lights when they turn on the switch! Pretty typical human nature.

Few of you will remember when there was a recurring rumor that somebody had invented a magic carburetor that would get "x" (usually 50 to 100) miles to the gallon but Mobil/Exxon/General Motors had purchased the magic carb and put it on the shelf. When you have a problem, it is often the opportunity for charlatans and conmen to swoop in and offer the magic bullet solution.(SIGH, why don't we learn?)

Mate the need for more capacity with environmental hysteria and you get a fertile ground to plant seeds like wind power. And solar power. Think of it--unlimited, free, renewable, "green" wind and solar. Let's get rid of that nasty oil and coal. Both Hillary and Obama have vowed to ruin the economy of West Virginia and shut down all coal plants. Refer back to the California story.

Problem is, people don't like higher prices for their power, and that is the only way you can produce wind and solar. Solution? Subsidize. You then have a hidden cost which is so much safer for politicians.

Subsidies for wind power in 2010 amounted to $5 billion and increased to $6 billion in 2013. In 2010, wind power produced 2.3% of the electricity generated and received 42% of federal subsidies. Wind power received $52.48/MWh; oil and gas, $0.63/MWh; coal $0.64/MWh; and solar a whopping $968.00/MWh produced.

 Enter another problem with the stuff we typically read--the difference between a Megawatt of capacity, a Megawatt Hour of production or consumption and the costs of those metrics. You add the fourth dimension of time and then complicate it with economics. Especially the liberal press (aka NYT) would rather we just deal with what we believe and feel. Sorry, physics doesn't work that way.

The federal government has subsidized wind power for the last 30 years. If you are a family of four, your contribution to the 2013 subsidy for wind power was $68.57. Think of that in terms of your electric bill and then think of receiving only 2.3% of the power from that source.

The authors and readers of the article mentioned above are well- acquainted with these facts, and the article then goes on to discuss how that energy produced tends to be either duplicated or wasted. One of the laws of physics that is really beyond my pay grade is that if those electrons are not used in the moment created, they disappear. Somehow. From an economic standpoint, easy to follow. Another reason that the less-dependable wind is duplicated by stand by and spinning reserve…because when you need the reserve, you need it in that moment.

We could go on, but let it be known that after 30 years of support, wind power and solar are not fulfilling their promise, but they keep spending your money.